Animal Lovers, Bridge-Builders, and Supervising Watchdogs: Framing and Civil Society Construction by Japanese Pro-Animal Organizations in the Kansai and Tokyo Areas

Unlike their counterparts in Europe and America, the citizen organizations acting for the well-being of animals in Japan have not received scholarly attention. In this research, I explore the activities of twelve Japanese pro-animal organizations in Tokyo and Kansai area from the perspective of social movement and civil society studies. The concept of a ‘pro-animal organization’ is used to refer generally to the collectives promoting animal well-being. By using the collective action frame analysis and the three core framing tasks – diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational – as the primarily analytical tools, I explore the grievances, tactics, motivational means, constructions of agency and identity as well as framing of civil society articulated in the newsletters and the interviews of the twelve organizations I interviewed in Japan in 2010. As the frame construction is always done in relation to the social and political context, I study how the organizations construct their roles as civil society actors in relation to other actors, such as the state, and the idea of citizen activism. The deficiencies in the animal welfare law and lack of knowledge among the public are identified as the main grievances. The primary tactic to overcome these problems was to educate and inform the citizens and authorities, because most organizations lack the channels to influence politically. The audiences were mostly portrayed as either ignorant bystanders or potential adherents. In order to motivate people to join their cause and to enforce the motivation within the organization, the organizations emphasized their uniqueness, proved their efficiency, claimed credit and celebrated even small improvements. The organizations tended to create three different roles for citizen pro-organizations in civil society: reactive, apolitical and emphatic animal lovers concentrating on saving individual animals, proactive, educative bridge-builders seeking to establish equal collaborative relations with authorities, and corrective, supervising watchdogs demanding change in delinquencies offending animal rights. Based on the results of this research, I suggest that by studying how and why the different relations between civil society and the governing actors of the state are constructed, a more versatile approach to citizens’ activism in its context can be achieved.

Globaali jihadistinen liike kumouksellisen sotataidon kehittäjänä

Tämän tutkimuksen lähtökohtana oli havainto siitä, että maailmanlaajuisen jihadismin toimet muistuttivat suuresti kumouksellista sodankäyntiä. Tarkastelemalla ilmiötä lähemmin oli nopeasti havaittavissa, että globaaliksi jihadistiseksi liikkeeksi tunnistettava toimija kävi ja oli kehittänyt taitoa käydä tällaista sotaa. Näin keskeiseksi tavoitteeksi tutkimukselle muodostuikin selvittää miten globaali jihadistinen liike oli kehittänyt kumouksellisen sodankäynnin sotataitoa ja sotataidollista ajattelua. Tämän tutkimuksen asetelma on perusluonteeltaan vertaileva. Se tarkastelee teoriaohjaavan sisällönanalyysin kautta kumouksellista sotataidollista kehitystä, tarkemmin sotataidollisen ajattelun kehitystä, vertaamalla globaalin jihadistisen liikkeen strategista ajattelua kumouksellista sotaa käyneiden strategien klassisiin mallinnuksiin. Strategioiden välinen vertailu suoritettiin tarkastelemalla globaalin jihadistisen liikkeen strategista ajattelua klassisista strategioista löydettävien vertailutasojen kautta. Globaalia jihadismia tarkastellessa kävi selville sen monisyinen luonne. Tätä toimijaa ei sellaisenaan voi kutsua yhdeksi organisaatioksi, eikä pelkästään ideologiaksi. Globaali jihadistinen liike tässä tutkimuksessa hahmotettiin sosiaaliseksi liikkeeksi, joka pitää sisällään yhteisen päämäärän eteen pyrkiviä, samaa ideologiaa tunnustavia organisaatiota, soluja ja yksittäisiä toimijoita. Vertailevan analyysin perusteella voidaan sanoa, että sosiaalisliikemäisestä luonteesta huolimatta ja osaltaan sen ansiosta globaali jihadistinen liike on kyennyt kehittämään kumouksellisen sodan strategista ajattelua suuntaan, jossa hajaantunut organisaatiomuoto, rajaamaton toiminta-alue ja kauas tulevaisuuteen tähtäävä tavoitteenasettelu ovat yhteiseen ideologiseen katsontaan sitoutuneina muovanneet liikkeestä toimijan, joka on kyennyt selviämään hengissä mittavista vastatoimista huolimatta. Se on myös kyennyt ylläpitämään itsetarkoitukseksi muodostunutta operaatiotahtia tavalla joka asettaa modernille turvallisuusympäristölle jatkuvia ja vakavia haasteita.

Social entrepreneurship – Believe in it or not!

The practice of social entrepreneurship already exists for a long time but the concept is quite new and has more recently raised a growing interest among academics. However, the majority of researches and considerations about the subject have taken a strong positive concern by omitting some sort of a critical reflection. The idea of this study is to consider the gap between the very optimistic and the more precautious concerns about social entrepreneurship. It means presenting the advantages and downsides connected to the topic in the business, public and third sector. The aim is to help the reader building his/her own belief on social entrepreneurship by considering the positive and negative sides of social entrepreneurship. Hence, the research is intended to take a critical step and aims to answer to the following research questions:  Shall we believe in social entrepreneurship?  What are the reasons for believing or not in social entrepreneurship taking into account the advantages and possible risks of it in the business, public, and third sector? The theoretical framework consists of the comparison between the promising and precautious sides about social entrepreneurship for private, public and non-governmental organizations including the actors or participants inside these sectors. The empirical part is conducted using a qualitative method. Personal interviews of experts in the fields of business, public and third sectors were handled. The purpose of this approach is to compare the critics in theory with the experience of persons dealing with social entrepreneurship. The results from the interviews revealed that in general, reasons for believing in social entrepreneurship prevail over critics about the subject. Social entrepreneurship may not yet represent a full performing business. Concerns for weakening the public power and putting aside the interests of communities in need may exist too. Furthermore, naïve and extra liberal ways of thinking or doing can lead to practices going in opposition with initial social objectives. Nevertheless, problems about social entrepreneurship would be mainly due to the young age of the movement. Time and experience would give better foundations and results to social entrepreneurs. Critics about social entrepreneurship could also easily be done to any sorts of business. Overall, the positive considerations of social entrepreneurship with skillful, motivated and responsible actors could represent some useful tools for enterprises, governments and charities. Some tools among many other possibilities to help people in need.